Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

New Businesses

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to encourage more accelerators and incubators outside London to support all entrepreneurs across the country.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe: We encourage business support across the country by investing in projects in many regions. The Government is investing £15m in 4 University Enterprise Zones (UEZs) to test how university-led incubators, with associated business support, can contribute to economic growth and productivity gains. The pilot UEZs are in Bradford (Leeds City Region), Bristol, Liverpool and Nottingham. The Government is also investing £4.8m capital to support the development of a new spin-out centre for small high tech businesses in the life sciences sector, based at Cambridge Science Park.

Sunday Trading

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the statement from the Association of Convenience Stores that longer trading hours on Sundays would harm small retailers.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe: Devolving the power to extend Sunday trading hours will enable local areas to determine the Sunday trading hours that best reflects the needs of local people, providing greater choice over when and where they shop. There are many reasons why people may continue to choose small retailers. They offer a diverse range of products and services from convenient locations. This is one of the reasons why the convenience stores sector last year saw the opening of two new stores a day and growth in turnover of 5%.

Department for International Development

Syria: Refugees

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have for preventing the stagnation of Syrian refugees in external camps; and what assessment they have made of the case for involving Syrian teachers in education for both children and adults in such camps.

Baroness Verma: The UK has been at the forefront of the response to the crisis in Syria and the region and has pledged over £1 billion, our largest ever response to a single humanitarian crisis. The UK has allocated £519 million to support refugees in the region and vulnerable host communities to date, including £279 million in Lebanon and £183 million in Jordan. Whilst addressing the immediate needs of refugees and vulnerable members of host communities, UK aid is also supporting their longer term resilience and stability through funding to Lebanese and Jordanian municipalities for the running of essential public services, such as education.   The UK is also supporting the No Lost Generation Initiative in support of Syrian children across the region and funding to UNICEF includes the construction and refurbishment of schools, the provision of school supplies, psycho-social support to children and incentives for Syrian teachers both in camps and in host communities. However, the decision to what extent Syrian teachers can be involved in the provision of education is determined by host Governments.

Ministry of Justice

Rights of Accused

Baroness Coussins: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the compatibility of the current United Kingdom law with the European Union Directives on the right to information in criminal proceedings, and on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings.

Lord Faulks: The UK Government opted into these Directives, on 22 October 2010 and on 8 March 2010 respectively, and in transposing them into domestic law undertook careful analysis of the state of the existing law and whether any new measures were required to ensure compliance. As a result of this assessment, in England and Wales transposition included several new legislative measures, subsequently approved by Parliament, and the Devolved Administrations made similar arrangements. A full transposition table was provided to the European Commission as is normal practice. As with all Directives, the Government keeps compliance under review.

Courts: Interpreters

Baroness Coussins: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to their response to the Independent Review of Quality Arrangements under the MoJ Language ServicesFramework Agreement, published by Optimity Matrix in December 2014, what progress has been made in discussions with the National Register of Public Services Interpreters on the development of an independent regulatory framework.

Lord Faulks: This Government is committed to providing a standard of interpreter that meets the needs of those requiring support in the justice system. Provision in interpretation and translation services across courts and tribunals is being explored in preparation for the end of the current contracts in October 2016. As part of this work, Ministry of Justice officials have met with representatives from a range of stakeholders, including the National Register of Public Service Interpreters.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Expert Committee on Pesticides

Baroness Parminter: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the Expert Committee on Pesticides has not published the minutes of its meeting of 20 May; and what assessment they have made of whether, by not publishing those minutes, the Committee has breached its terms of reference.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble: The minutes of the meeting of the 20 May have been published. They were published on 23 July 2015.

Birds: Conservation

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to reverse the decline in wild bird populations in the United Kingdom and the Overseas Territories.

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to protect and conserve all forms of wild flora and fauna in the United Kingdom and the Overseas Territories, including rare and endangered species.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble: The UK is committed to protecting wildlife in accordance with the EU Habitats and Birds Directives through domestic legislation and the designation of Special Sites of Scientific Interest, Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation.   Biodiversity is a devolved matter. In England, we will take forward our manifesto commitment to produce a 25 year strategy for the environment, which will include biodiversity. Over the next five years we will be investing more than £3 billion in environmental outcomes as part of the Rural Development Programme for England (2014-2020). This funding will enhance England’s countryside, enabling us, among other things, to clean up our rivers and lakes, protect drystone walls and hedges, and help birds, bees and other species to thrive.   Biodiversity is one of the main objectives in the new Countryside Stewardship Scheme, to be funded under the Rural Development Programme. The Wild Pollinator and Farm Wildlife Package options within the scheme will be of particular benefit to wild pollinators, farmland birds and other species.   We will ensure that our public forests and woodland are kept in trust for the nation and plant another 11 million trees.   Since 2010, we have created over 67,000 hectares of priority habitats such as arable field margins, wetlands and woodlands. We have also maintained over 95% of our Sites of Special Scientific Interest – our most important sites for wildlife – in favourable or recovering condition and put in place Marine Conservation Zones to supplement the stretches of our sea that are already marine protected areas.   UK Overseas Territory (OT) Governments are constitutionally responsible for the protection and conservation of their natural environments. The UK Government cherishes the environmental assets of the OTs and we work in partnership with OT Governments to identify where our support can be most effective, including through access to expertise, technical advice and training and through the Overseas Territory Environment and Climate Fund (Darwin Plus).   Through Darwin Plus, the UK Government has committed approximately £5.2 million since 2012 to help protect the natural environment in the OTs. Projects currently being funded range from conserving four keystone tree species in St Helena, to an assessment of the conservation status of the endangered Atlantic yellow-nosed albatross on Tristan da Cunha.   Joint UK Government and South Atlantic OTs funding also supports a co-ordinating post based in the Falkland Islands to help meet obligations arising from the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels and to assist with the planning and implementation of albatross and petrel conservation work.

Penguins: British Overseas Territories

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the population trends of penguins in the Overseas Territories.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble: UK Overseas Territory (OT) Governments are constitutionally responsible for the protection and conservation of their natural environments. Through the UK Government-funded Overseas Territory Environment and Climate Fund (Darwin Plus) we have committed approximately £5.2 million since 2012 to supporting environment projects in the OTs. A number of these have helped to conserve penguins.   Darwin Plus has funded projects to create a regional database of penguin tracking data, population analysis and modelling and to deploy autonomous camera units to monitor penguin populations in the British Antarctic Territory and South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands.   In addition, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office recently funded a project led by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds to carry out the first ever stocktake of species in the OTs. The study, completed between January 2013 and March 2014, with further work in 2015, brought together all known species records and conservation assessments. Although only a few OTs have permanent penguin populations, it found that the islands of the OTs include more penguins than any other nation on earth, holding an estimated 36% of the world’s population of southern rockhopper penguins and 34% of gentoo penguins.

Water: Pollution

Viscount Hanworth: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the current state of the monitoring in the United Kingdom of the industrial chemicals present in groundwater and river water, in particular pseudo-oestrogens (xenoestrogens) and those substances itemised in Directive 2008/105/EC.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble: In England, the Environment Agency has an extensive monitoring network over both surface and groundwaters, to comply with European groundwater legislation (2006/118/EC) and requirements under the EU Priority Substances Directive (2008/105/EC and its update, 2013/39/EU). It monitors surface waters for priority substances (set at EU level), and also certain other chemicals of a national, but not European, concern. The Environment Agency are developing a programme to monitor priority substances that accumulate in biota (e.g. in fish or shellfish) at a number of freshwater sites in England. The Environment Agency is shortly to start contributing to the European-wide surveillance of a number of emerging substances of concern (the watch list) required under Directive 2013/39/EU. This monitoring will include the xenoestrogen ethinyloestradiol.

Animal Feed: Residues

The Countess of Mar: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the report published in March by the WHO Cancer Panel on the carcinogenicity of glyphosate, what steps they are taking to encourage the home production of proteins which have not been sprayed with Roundup as a pre-harvest desiccant in order to reduce the dependence of the animal feed industry on imported genetically modified Roundup-ready soy.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble: Glyphosate is currently approved for use as a herbicide in the EU. Products such as Roundup which contain glyphosate are authorised in the UK for a range of uses including pre-harvest uses in protein crops. Decisions on approval and authorisation are based on an assessment of risks to health and the environment.   All pesticide approvals are subject to regular review to ensure that they meet modern safety standards. The review of glyphosate is currently being carried out by the European Food Safety Authority. If the review were to provide new evidence to show that the use of glyphosate is no longer safe, the EU Commission has the power to withdraw its approval. As part of the overall evidence, the review is considering the Monograph on glyphosate published by the International Agency for Research on Cancer on 29 July 2015.   The regulatory system for pesticides is designed to ensure that there are no unacceptable risks arising from their use. The controls include residue limits in EU and imported food, including soy. If produce from third countries contains residues at above the levels permitted, import will not be allowed.   The Government supports research on sustainable protein production, which includes increasing the domestic supply of sustainably produced vegetable protein for farmed animals. In part, this is carried out under the Sustainable Agriculture and Food Innovation Platform, run by Innovate UK.

Home Office

Private Rented Housing

Lord Beecham: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the pilot scheme in the West Midlands under which landlords were required to conduct checks to establish the right of prospective tenants to rent private dwellings.

Lord Bates: The Government has conducted an evaluation of the first phase of the right to rent scheme in the West Midlands which is currently being assessed. The Government has also sought the views of experts in the private rented sector which will be considered together with the findings in deciding the expansion of the scheme. The Government will make a formal announcement in due course.

Children in Care: Kent

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the increase in the number of asylum-seeking children in the care of Kent County Council, (1) what steps they plan to take to help address demands on social services in the county, and (2) what steps they plan to take to help make up the £5.5 million shortfall incurred by Kent County Council for this purpose.

Lord Bates: The Government is very aware of the pressures currently faced by Kent County Council in caring for unaccompanied asylum seeking children. We are working closely with Kent on the operational and financial implications of this. We are also working with Kent and other local authorities to consider possible future arrangements for the management of unaccompanied asylum seeking children. In the meantime, we are providing additional funding to local authorities agreeing to accept such cases from Kent.

Asylum: Syria

The Marquess of Lothian: To ask Her Majesty’s Government (1) whether the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Relocation scheme will be expanded and (2) why so few vulnerable Syrians have been relocated to date.

Lord Bates: An expansion to the Syrian Vulnerable Persons' Scheme has been announced. Her Majesty's Government now intends to resettle 20,000 Syrians in need of protection during this Parliament.The Scheme is based on need, prioritising those who cannot be supported effectively in their region of origin: women and children at risk, people in severe need of medical care and survivors of torture and violence. We work closely with the UNHCR to identify cases that they deem to be in need of resettlement and we will continue this work to ensure even greater numbers are identified and provided with refuge in the UK. Individuals admitted under the Scheme to date are in addition to nearly 5,000 Syrian nationals who have been granted asylum in the UK since the crisis there began.

Refugees: Syria

Lord Crisp: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to identify medical practitioners and other qualified health professionals amongst Syrian refugees and make arrangements for them to enter the United Kingdom and continue their practice here.

Lord Crisp: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to work with medical schools to enable Syrian refugees who are medical students to continue their studies in the United Kingdom.

Lord Crisp: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to work with the medical, nursing and midwifery Royal Colleges, the General Medical Council, the Nursing and Midwifery Council, and the regulators of other healthcare professions to enable Syrian refugees who are qualified health professionals to enter practice in the United Kingdom.

Lord Crisp: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to identify biomedical researchers and academics amongst Syrian refugees and make arrangements for them to enter the United Kingdom and to assist them in finding relevant employment.

Lord Bates: The Syrian Vulnerable Persons' Resettlement (VPR) scheme will continue to prioritise the most vulnerable: people requiring urgent medical treatment, survivors of torture and violence, and women and children at risk. We are discussing with the UNCHR and other partners the extent to which the current criteria should be extended to ensure that a greater number of people qualify for the scheme.Beneficiaries of the scheme will have full right to work in the UK and will be able to seek employment subject to meeting appropriate professional standards. There are no plans specifically to target medical practitioners, medical students or any other professional group because the scheme is a humanitarian one based on the protection needs of individual refugees, not their professional qualifications.

Syria: Refugees

Lord Mawhinney: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what guidance and restrictions they have given to the UNHCR about the selection of Syrian refugees for resettlement in the United Kingdom.

Lord Bates: The UK will continue to use the established UNHCR process for identifying and resettling refugees. We are in discussion with the UNHCR on the precise criteria for selecting cases for the expanded resettlement scheme. However, we are clear that the most vulnerable cases will be prioritised and we will only resettle those people that we and the UNHCR agree require resettlement in a country like the UK.

Refugees: Syria

Lord Mawhinney: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their estimate of how many Syrian refugees will arrive in the United Kingdom for resettlement in the next 12 months.

Lord Bates: We intend to resettle 20,000 Syrians in need of protection during this Parliament. We will continue to work closely with the UNHCR to identify appropriate cases, prioritising the most vulnerable. As the expanded scheme is based on need and reliant on the UNHCR and other partners to make it work, it is not possible or appropriate to set any sort of annual target, but we are clear that we want to help people as quickly as possible.

Undocumented Migrants

Lord Blencathra: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to detect people from Iraq, Pakistan, Palestine and Albania using stolen Syrian passports to enter the United Kingdom.

Lord Bates: Border Force uses a range of methods to detect and deter those seeking to enter the UK using stolen passports. This includes the use of advanced technology to identify those attempting to travel to the UK on lost or stolen documentation. Immigration Enforcement operates a network of overseas liaison officers whose role includes working with transport operators to identify imposters and prevent them from travelling to the UK. At the UK border, Border Force Officers, with expertise in forgery and imposter detection, carry out comprehensive checks on all passengers arriving at passport control to establish authenticity and whether the passenger is the rightful holder.

Asylum: Finance

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to reverse the cut imposed with effect from August on asylum support, in the light of the fact that this has been frozen since 2011; and whether they will introduce special rates for children under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.

Lord Bates: There have been two recent changes to the level of the cash allowances provided to destitute asylum seekers to cover their essential living needs.With effect from 6 April, the allowance provided to asylum seekers without dependants was raised to £36.95 per week (from £36.62).Since 10 August a standard payment of £36.95 per week has been provided for each person in a family group (the asylum seeker and any dependants). This resulted in a reduction in the total allowance provided to asylum seekers with children. The change was made because a review of the support system showed that the allowances previously provided exceeded the amount necessary to cover essential living needs.There are no plans to reverse either of these changes. The Government generally reviews the level of the allowances each year and plans to do so again in 2016.

Asylum: Finance

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government on what grounds their consultation on reforming support for failed asylum seekers proposes to remove all support from some 15,000 asylum applicants who are not able to produce sufficient evidence to sustain their cases; what assessment they have made of the likelihood that such people will be removed or returned to their countries of origin; and whether they plan to publish a summary of the consultation and their response to it.

Lord Bates: The consultation document on reforming support for failed asylum seekers published on 4 August referred to the estimated 15,000 failed asylum seekers and their dependants who were in receipt of support under section 95 or section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 at 31 March 2015. It set out proposals for transitional arrangements for these cases, under which that support would remain available, subject to the use of existing powers under which it can be discontinued. A summary of the consultation and the Government’s response to it will be published in due course.

Overseas Students: Immigration Controls

Lord Lexden: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have plans to exclude overseas students in institutions of further education from their net migration target.

Lord Bates: International students are included in net migration statistics that are produced by the independent Office for National Statistics (ONS). In line with the internationally agreed UN definition, these statistics define a migrant as someone changing their normal place of residence for more than a year. Students are therefore included in the same way as other migrants. Other countries, such as the United States, Canada, and Australia also include students in their net migration figures. Like other migrants, students who stay for longer than 12 months have an impact on communities, infrastructure and services while they are here, so it is right that they are included in the net migration count. The ONS estimates that in the year ending March 2015 there was a difference of 96,000 in the number of non-EU students coming to and leaving the UK. Therefore student emigration, or the lack of it, is a key driver of overall net migration.

Immigration Controls: Pakistan

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by the Minister of State for International Development, Desmond Swayne, on 11 September (HC8462), which states that the government of Pakistan has publicly recognised "the problems facing minorities, and the need to bring an end to religious persecutions", why the current Home Office guidance Pakistan: Christians and Christian Converts states that "there are a large number of Christians in the country and the evidence does not indicate that Christians are, in general, subject to a real risk of persecution or inhuman or degrading treatment"; and whether, in the light of the most recent evidence, they now plan to revise this guidance.

Lord Bates: The UK recognises there may be individual cases of religious persecution. However, not all Christians are at risk. It is important to carefully consider each case on its merits.This position was confirmed by the courts in December 2014 in the country guidance case ‘AK and SK (Christians: risk) Pakistan CG [2014] UKUT 569 (IAC)’.Therefore, whilst the Home Office is always reviewing country of origin information and the accompanying guidance on a particular issue, its position is consistent with the statement made by the Minister of State for International Development, Desmond Swayne, on 11 September.

Immigration Rules

Lord Green of Deddington: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Bates on 14 July (HL1075), whether a non-EU citizen in possession of (1) a temporary, and (2) a permanent, residence permit issued by the government of Germany may enter the United Kingdom without a visa.

Lord Bates: A non-EU citizen who holds a valid, genuine residence card issued under Article 10 of Directive 2004/38/EC, or a permanent residence card issued under Article 20, may enter the UK without a visa only where they are joining or accompanying their EU national family member to the UK. This applies only to Article 10 and 20 residence cards, which are issued to family members of EU nationals who are exercising free movement rights in a Member State other than that of which they are a national. Residence documentation issued by another Member State on any other basis under their domestic legislation does not exempt the holder from the requirement to hold a visa to enter the UK.

Refugees: Legal Aid Scheme

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have responded, or plan to respond, to the British Red Cross report Not so Straightforward: the need for qualified legal aid support in refugee family reunion; if so, whether they will place copies in the Library of the House; and whether they plan to simplify the current application form for entry to the United Kingdom for family reunion and to provide clear and consistent guidance about it.

Lord Bates: Following the publication of the report, I wrote to the British Red Cross to confirm that we are reviewing our process for dealing with applications for refugee family reunion in consultation with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Justice.We are working closely with the British Red Cross and are considering the recommendations in detail.We are in the process of improving our guidance so that it is clear, consistent and accessible. We are also redesigning the application form to ensure that applicants better understand the process and what is required of them.Once the policy review is complete, we will provide a consolidated response to the report and place a copy in the Library of the House.

*No heading*

The Marquess of Lothian: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any plans to change their net migration target to exclude international students; and what assessment they have made of whether the current system of including international students in the target is having a negative effect on the United Kingdom position as a destination for international students.

Lord Bates: Published Home Office immigration statistics record data on all people coming to the UK or remaining here who are subject to immigration control. This includes all non-EU students. International students are also included in net migration statistics that are produced by the independent Office for National Statistics (ONS). In line with the internationally agreed UN definition, these statistics define a migrant as someone changing their normal place of residence for more than a year. Students are therefore included in the same way as other migrants. Other countries, such as the United States, Canada, and Australia also include students in their net migration figures. Like other migrants, students who stay for longer than 12 months have an impact on communities, infrastructure and services while they are here, so it is right that they are included in the net migration count. The ONS estimates that in the year ending March 2015 there was a difference of 96,000 in the number of non-EU students coming to and leaving the UK. Therefore student emigration, or the lack of it, is a key driver of overall net migration. We have an excellent offer for international students, and as a result we remain the second most popular destination in the world for international higher education students. The latest figures show that visa applications from university students are now 17% higher than they were in 2010 and visa applications to Russell Group universities are 33% higher than in 2010.

HM Treasury

Minimum Wage

Lord Beecham: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many staff are employed by HM Revenue and Customs to enforce the national minimum wage; how many cases have been brought since 7 May 2014 in respect of alleged failure to pay the national minimum wage; and what is the total amount of fines (1) imposed, and (2) collected, since 7 May 2014 in respect of cases of failure to pay the national minimum wage.

Lord Bridges of Headley: The government is committed to increasing compliance with minimum wage legislation and effective enforcement of it. Everyone who is entitled to the minimum wage should receive it. Employers who pay workers less than the minimum wage not only have to pay back arrears of wages at current minimum wage rates but also face financial penalties of up to £20,000 per underpaid worker.   There are currently 232 staff working in National Minimum Wage for HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), up from 171 at the start of 2014/15. The government takes the enforcement of National Minimum Wage very seriously and has increased funding from £8m in 2013/14 to £13.2m in 2015/16.   Civil penalties were introduced on 6 April 2009 for employers who are found to have underpaid their workers. The following table provides a breakdown of penalties issued by year:   YearPenalties issued2009-10£111,1832010-11£520,5682011-12£766,8072012-13£776,5172013-14£815,2692014-15£934,660   The vast majority of employers pay penalties upon being issued with a Notice of Underpayment. Where they do not, HMRC will seek to recover through the civil recovery route.   In the period 2009/10 –2014/15, HMRC issued penalties totalling nearly £4m, of which less than 2% is currently uncollected and is being actively pursued through civil recovery processes.   HMRC do not hold data in a format to be able to provide information on unpaid arrears for the time range specified. It is not possible to identify a specific timescale of when a penalty was issued in relation to the time debt management processes took place.

Public Expenditure

Lord West of Spithead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether decisions on the next Comprehensive Spending Review will be taken before the outcome of the next Strategic Defence and Security Review.

Lord Bridges of Headley: An error has been identified in the written answer given on 21 September 2015.The correct answer should have been:

The Spending Review will be published on 25th November, and work is currently underway on the National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) which we expect to publish before the end of the year. These reviews will be closely aligned, recognising that economic security and national security are two sides of the same coin.   At the Summer Budget, the Government committed to increased spending on defence and security, and to meet the properly measured NATO pledge to spend 2 per cent of GDP on defence every year of this decade. The allocation of a Joint Security Fund of up to an additional £1.5 billion per year by 2020/21, available to the Armed Forces and Security and Intelligence agencies, will also be based on the conclusions of the SDSR.

Lord Bridges: The Spending Review will be published on 25th November, and work is currently underway on the National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) which we expect to publish before the end of the year. These reviews will be closely aligned, recognising that economic security and national security are two sides of the same coin.   At the Summer Budget, the Government committed to increased spending on defence and security, and to meet the properly measured NATO pledge to spend 2 per cent of GDP on defence every year of this decade. The allocation of a Joint Security Fund of up to an additional £1.5 billion per year by 2020/21, available to the Armed Forces and Security and Intelligence agencies, will also be based on the conclusions of the SDSR.

Revenue and Customs: Telephone Services

Lord Quirk: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord O’Neill of Gatley on 30 July (HL1654), whether HM Revenue and Customs has target times by which members of the public can reasonably expect to get through on the telephone and speak to an official; and by what percentage extent there has been a change over the past three years in the number of telephone calls from the public seeking information or assistance from that Department.

Lord Bridges of Headley: An error has been identified in the written answer given on 21 September 2015.The correct answer should have been:

As stated in an earlier response (HL897), HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) publishes its performance data quarterly on the gov.uk website.   HMRC handles 50 million calls a year from customers. It aims to answer 80 per cent of all calls and accepts that it is not currently delivering on that aspiration. HMRC published a press release on 25 June in which it apologised for the poor service, acknowledged that some customers were struggling to get through on the telephone and outlined a number of initiatives it is putting in place to improve performance.

Lord Bridges: As stated in an earlier response (HL897), HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) publishes its performance data quarterly on the gov.uk website.   HMRC handles 50 million calls a year from customers. It aims to answer 80 per cent of all calls and accepts that it is not currently delivering on that aspiration. HMRC published a press release on 25 June in which it apologised for the poor service, acknowledged that some customers were struggling to get through on the telephone and outlined a number of initiatives it is putting in place to improve performance.

Cabinet Office

Peers: Ministerial Policy Advisers

Lord Lexden: To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the convention that peers who are ministerial special advisers do not speak on the floor of the House was first established.

Lord Bridges of Headley: It has been accepted practice under successive administrations that special advisers can vote but not speak.

Department of Health

Warfarin

Baroness Gardner of Parkes: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many patients on long-term Warfarin prescriptions now have access to self-monitoring technology; and whether Clinical Commissioning Groups support moves towards further patient self-management.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Information on the number of patients on long-term Warfarin prescriptions who have access to self-monitoring technology is not collected centrally.   NHS England and clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) have responsibility for commissioned services for patients who receive anticoagulation treatments. It is for individual CCGs to commission treatment and services for patients on anticoagulation treatment or other medications which require monitoring, as they are best placed to identify what is needed in their local areas.   There is guidance in place to support CCGs in planning services for patients who receive anticoagulation treatments. Under its Diagnostics Assessment Programme, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published guidance on self-monitoring of anticoagulation treatments which is attached and also available at:   http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/dg14   NICE has also published quality standards on the management and treatment of atrial fibrillation which set out that self-monitoring should be offered as an option to appropriate patients. The guidance is also attached and available at:   http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/qs93/chapter/Quality-statement-6-developmental-Selfmonitoring-of-anticoagulation 



Atrial Fibrillation Guidance
(PDF Document, 187.26 KB)




Self monitoring Anticoagulation treatments
(PDF Document, 172.47 KB)

Breast Cancer: Drugs

Lord MacKenzie of Culkein: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the number of lives that might be saved per annum from licensing bisphosphonates for the treatment of early post-menopausal breast cancer.

Lord MacKenzie of Culkein: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether doctors are free to prescribe bisphosphonates in the treatment of early stage breast cancer despite the fact that it is not presently licensed for that purpose.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Neither the Department nor NHS England have made an assessment of the number of lives that might be saved per annum from licensing bisphosphonates for the treatment of early post-menopausal breast cancer.   Doctors can already prescribe a drug outside its licensed indications where they judge it to be the most clinically appropriate treatment for an individual patient.

Breast Cancer: Drugs

Lord MacKenzie of Culkein: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the cost to the National Health Service of bisphosphonates and whether they will take steps to encourage the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to consider the evidence base for the prescription of these drugs in treatment of early stage breast cancer.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The net ingredient cost of prescription items dispensed in the community in England for bisphosphonates1 in 2014, was £16.813 million2.   In secondary care, the cost in 2014 was £35.841 million3.   The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published clinical guidelines on early and locally advanced breast cancer and advanced breast cancer, published in February 2009, and familial breast cancer published in June 2013. NICE periodically reviews its guidance to take account of new and emerging evidence.   A copy of these clinical guidelines are attached.   1 Bisphosphonates are defined as those included in paragraph 6.6.2 (Bisphosphonates and other drugs affecting bone metabolism) of the British National Formulary (BNF) but excluding denosumab and strontium ranelate. 2 Source: Prescription Cost Analysis (PCA) provided by the Health and Social Care Information Centre 3 Source: Hospital Pharmacy Audit Index (HPAI) provided by IMS Health   



Early and locally advanced breast cancer guideline
(PDF Document, 200.81 KB)




Advanced breast cancer guidelines
(PDF Document, 186.84 KB)




Familial breast cancer guidelines
(PDF Document, 268.55 KB)

NHS: Fees and Charges

Lord Marlesford: To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they will introduce National Health Service numbers that differentiate between those who are entitled to the full facilities of the National Health Service without charge and those for whom such services are available on payment.

Lord Prior of Brampton: National Health Services numbers are a patient safety measure, and do not indicate either entitlement to free NHS care or chargeable status. Changes to the NHS record are being made to enable the NHS to supplement that record with information that will support a decision about whether a patient is chargeable or not when they present for NHS care.

National Insurance and NHS Numbers

Lord Marlesford: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many (1) National Health Service numbers, and (2) National Insurance numbers, are currently live; and whether the General Register Office reports deaths to the Department of Health and the Department for Work and Pensions.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The total number of live National Health Service numbers is approximately 72 million (England and Wales). The latest available figures (August 2015) show that there are approximately 67.6 Million National Insurance records on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) Customer Information System.   The Health & Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC), on behalf of the Department of Health, receives a weekly feed of death notifications from the General Register Office (GRO). These are applied to the Personal Demographics Service on the Spine, with any non-automatic matches dealt with by the PDS National Back Office within HSCIC.   Upon the death of an individual DWP receives automatic updates from the three GROs. These are sent for England, Wales and Scotland on a daily basis, and for Northern Ireland on a weekly basis.

*No heading*

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what rebate payments have been paid by the pharmaceutical industry in each quarter since the commencement of the current Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme; and what proportion of those payments has been reinvested in innovative medicines.

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of comments by the NHS National Clinical Director for Specialised Services in July stating that the NHS was unlikely to be able to afford increasing costs for specialised drugs, whether they plan to investigate why NHS England Specialised Services have not received any additional funding to spend on new products through the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme, and where those available funds have been spent within NHS England.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The following table includes information on aggregate payments received by the Department since the beginning of the Pharmaceutical Scheme 2014. The Department publishes quarterly information on the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme (PPRS) sales and payments on the Government’s website at:   https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pprs-quarterly-net-sales-and-payment-information   Year and Quarter (Q)Aggregate Payments Received by the Department of Health2014 Q1£74 million2014 Q2£76 million2014 Q3£79 million2014 Q4£81 million2015 Q1£208 million2015 Q2£209 million   The Department ensures that all the income it receives from PPRS payments in England is reinvested in the National Health Service for patients’ benefit. The Department includes the expected PPRS payments in setting the NHS England allocations in advance of each year.   As a statutory organisation, it is for NHS England to ensure that its actions are in line with its statutory duties. NHS England is responsible for allocating its overall budget (which includes expected income from PPRS payments in England) across commissioning areas, including specialised commissioning and clinical commissioning groups. Following normal Government accounting rules, there is no separately identified or ring-fenced funding stream associated with the PPRS payments.   The Government believes that NHS commissioners and providers are best placed to decide how to allocate their budgets to deliver improvements in the outcomes for patients. The PPRS includes a number of commitments for improving patient outcomes by improving access to clinically and cost effective medicines.

*No heading*

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what the Department of Health is doing to prioritise the availability of treatments for rare blood cancers, such as multiple myeloma.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Ensuring that the National Health Service is able to support the availability and use of effective medicines for cancers, including rare blood cancer, is a key priority.   Cancer 52, an organisation which specifically represents patients with rarer cancers, was represented on the independent Cancer Taskforce. The Taskforce published its report, Achieving World-Class Cancer Outcomes: A Strategy for England 2015-2020, in July, and made many recommendations relevant to rarer and blood cancers, focussing in particular on improving access to diagnostic testing, including fast, direct general practitioner access to key blood tests, and increasing patient access to the most advanced treatments. NHS England, Public Health England and other healthcare organisations are now considering the detail of the individual recommendations.   Earlier in 2015, NHS England consulted on the principles and process by which it makes investment decisions in specialised services, which address the issue of rarity. The outcome of future investment decisions taken by NHS England will be published in accordance with the new process. NHS England’s response to the consultation is attached, and can be found at:   https://www.england.nhs.uk/commissioning/spec-services/key-docs/ In addition to drug treatments for blood cancers, NHS England also commissions blood and bone marrow transplantation in accordance with its current published policy. A revision of the policy is planned during 2015-16 to be implemented during 2016-17. The current published policy is attached, and can be found at:   http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/b04-p-a.pdf   The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence is developing guidelines for the treatment of multiple myeloma and these are currently subject to public consultation. 



NHS England consultation response
(PDF Document, 113.51 KB)




Transplantation policy April 2013
(PDF Document, 448.89 KB)

*No heading*

Lord Crisp: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will be represented at the WHO dialogue on non-communicable diseases and development co-operation taking place in Geneva on 30 November.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Government is committed to tackling non-communicable disease as the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in our country and around the globe. We will make a decision on attendance at the meeting in Geneva shortly.

*No heading*

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have plans to review the quality of eye tests carried out by optometrists and dispensing opticians.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Under the Sight Testing (Examination and Prescription) (No.2) Regulations 1989, when a doctor or optometrist carries out a sight test, they have a legal duty to perform such examinations that are necessary to detect signs of injury, disease or abnormality and to refer the patient for further investigation if necessary. They will also carry out tests to determine if the patient requires an optical appliance to correct a defect in sight.   These requirements apply to all sight tests, whether provided on the National Health Service or privately.   The General Optical Council (GOC) is the regulatory body for optometrists who carry out sight tests and any concern about the quality of sight tests can be raised directly with the GOC.   Dispensing opticians do not carry out sight tests.

*No heading*

Lord Blencathra: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 16 September (HL2100), whether they plan to remove the National Health Service ban on treating injured British military personnel who have undergone some private medical treatment, however small, for their injuries.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Any National Health Service patient is free to choose to fund privately a healthcare procedure, but as a result will generally be required to pay costs associated with that procedure. Whether the NHS provides on-going care is addressed on a case by case basis. Given the circumstances relating to a small number of very seriously injured veterans, NHS England is ensuring that they continue to receive on-going care. The NHS works closely with the Ministry of Defence to support injured service personnel through the transition process when they are discharged from the Armed Forces. We do not plan to exempt serving personnel or veterans from the principles of the NHS, but will ensure that all the circumstances of individual cases are taken into account when making decisions on the care of serving personnel and veterans.

*No heading*

Baroness Hodgson of Abinger: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the National Health Service Litigation Authority's Sign Up to Safety maternity-related projects include measures to improve the care of multiple pregnancies; and if so, when they expect to report the findings on those projects.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Under the Sign up to Safety Scheme £8 Million has been awarded to 25 maternity units who submitted a successful bid to the National Health Service Litigation Authority incentivisation scheme. Most of the successful bids related to improvements in foetal monitoring (equipment and training) supervision, human factors and team working or a combination of these themes.   All 51 bids (successful and unsuccessful) had to demonstrate a link to their claims. As such none of the bids made a specific reference to multiple births, the focus was on the causes within maternity that resulted in a particular injury outcome, for example resulting in brain damage   A full evaluation of the impact of this scheme will be available next year.

*No heading*

Baroness Hodgson of Abinger: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether NHS England’s Maternity Safety Thermometer will be updated to include a function to allow units to compare their data by (1) singleton, and (2) multiple, pregnancies; and if so, how they plan to use this information to drive improvements in care.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Maternity Safety Thermometer includes a function to allow staff to record whether the pregnancy in question was a singleton or multiple pregnancy. National Health Service providers who use the Maternity Safety Thermometer are therefore able to collect and use this information to drive improvements in care.

*No heading*

Baroness Hodgson of Abinger: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Care Quality Commission’s final report outlining the findings of their national maternity survey will include a specific summary setting out the experience of multiple birth mothers.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of health and adult social care in England. The CQC has advised that the responses to the national survey of National Health Service maternity services are currently being collated and analysed. Until all of this data has been analysed it is not possible for the CQC to comment on what will be included in the final report.

*No heading*

Baroness Hodgson of Abinger: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion of multiple pregnancies result in one or more babies with (1) Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, (2) Attention Deficit Disorder, (3) cerebral palsy, and (4) speech and language delays; and what estimate they have made of the additional costs to families and public services in addressing each of those needs.

Lord Prior of Brampton: This information is not collected centrally.   The majority of the conditions such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Attention Deficit Disorder, cerebral palsy and speech and language delays identified in the question would only become apparent later in life. The Hospital Episode Statistics, which are collected by Health and Social Care Information Centre does not hold this data.   There has been no assessment made of the cost to families or public services of the implications of these conditions in multiple pregnancies.

*No heading*

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what account they are taking of the submission by the Nuffield Trust on National Health Service funding in the 2015 Comprehensive Spending Review.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Government has been clear that it wants to engage and harness a wider range of expertise as part of the 2015 Spending Review process and accordingly welcomes the submission of the Nuffield Trust.   Rising demands and continued fiscal constraint means that the National Health Service faces challenges in ensuring that it remains financially sustainable in the future. The Government believes that the answer to these challenges lies in changing the way services are delivered and keeping people well and independent for longer.   This is why the Government has committed to fully meeting the additional funding requirement – £8 billion per year over and above inflation by 2020-21 – identified by the NHS Five Year Forward View.

*No heading*

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the most recent annual figure for the turnover of chief executives of National Health Service organisations.

Lord Prior of Brampton: This information is not held centrally.   However, leadership experience and stability are an important factor in running successful National Health Service organisations. This is precisely why one of the new functions of NHS Improvement, working with other organisations such as Health Education England, will be to create and support the new generation of NHS leaders.

*No heading*

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the average length of tenure of chief executives in the National Health Service.

Lord Prior of Brampton: This information is not collected or held centrally.

*No heading*

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many National Health Service organisations currently have vacancies for chief executive posts.

Lord Prior of Brampton: This information is not held centrally by the Department.

*No heading*

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why people who have reached the age of 75 are not automatically invited for a bowel screening to identify symptoms of bowel cancer.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) advises Ministers and the National Health Service in all four countries about all aspects of screening policy and supports implementation based on the best available evidence.  Bowel cancer screening by Faecal Occult Blood testing for men and women aged 50-74 was recommended by the UK NSC in July 2003. Following this recommendation, the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England initially invited men and women aged 60-69 years old as the programme was rolled out across the country. This has now been extended to men and women aged up to 74, as recommended in the Cancer Reform Strategy (2007). The programme offers screening up to the age of 74 based on the original English1 and Danish2 trials along with evidence published in 2010 (Cairns et al, 2010) which recommended that surveillance seizes at the age of 75.  No assessment has been made regarding automatically inviting those over 75 years for bowel screening. Men and women aged above the eligible age limit have been able to self-refer for screening every two years since the programme began, and so far over 150,000 have done so.   1Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, Moss SM, Amar SS, Balfour TW, James PD, Mangham CM. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1996:348(9040);1472-7 2 Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen OD, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test.

*No heading*

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether not automatically inviting those aged 75 or over for a bowel screening test complies with their duties under the Equalities Act 2010.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) advises Ministers and the National Health Service in all four countries about all aspects of screening policy and supports implementation based on the best available evidence.  Bowel cancer screening by Faecal Occult Blood testing for men and women aged 50-74 was recommended by the UK NSC in July 2003. Following this recommendation, the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England initially invited men and women aged 60-69 years old as the programme was rolled out across the country. This has now been extended to men and women aged up to 74, as recommended in the Cancer Reform Strategy (2007). The programme offers screening up to the age of 74 based on the original English1 and Danish2 trials along with evidence published in 2010 (Cairns et al, 2010) which recommended that surveillance seizes at the age of 75.  No assessment has been made regarding automatically inviting those over 75 years for bowel screening. Men and women aged above the eligible age limit have been able to self-refer for screening every two years since the programme began, and so far over 150,000 have done so. 1Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, Moss SM, Amar SS, Balfour TW, James PD, Mangham CM. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1996:348(9040);1472-7 2Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen OD, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test.

*No heading*

Baroness Uddin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans are in place to reduce the current average wait for children before a diagnosis of autism.

Baroness Uddin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what measures are in place to support families waiting for a diagnosis of autism for a child.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines on autism make it clear that families should wait no more than three months to start diagnosis. Every part of the National Health Service should be adhering to these guidelines.   There are new arrangements for children and young people with special educational needs, introduced by the Children and Families Act 2014. These require clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and local authorities to make joint arrangements for ensuring a coordinated assessment of the range of eligible children’s needs, and the development of an Education, Health and Care plan to provide necessary support.   NHS England’s Children with Complex Needs Implementation Board is leading working on ensuring robust and accountability mechanisms are in place to ensure delivery and to allow NHS England to hold CCGs to account for performance.

*No heading*

Baroness Uddin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to improve awareness of cerebral palsy amongst (1) medical generalists, and (2) those working in schools.

Baroness Uddin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to improve access to specialist health and educational interventions for children with cerebral palsy.

Baroness Uddin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to introduce a national register of children with cerebral palsy, including data on the number of children identified with the condition, and the education, health and care provision available to support those children.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Government has taken a number of steps to support people with cerebral palsy. Health Education England is mandated to develop training for general practitioners to develop a special interest in the care of young people with long-term conditions. We have also funded the development of Paediatric Care online, a resource for supporting the clinical workforce across the full range of children’s health issues.   The Government funded the development of Disability Matters (launched in February 2015). This is an e-learning tool to improve the skills of anyone working to support the needs of people with a disability or complex need (of all ages), and can be used by teachers and health professionals.   The Government has introduced a new statutory framework for children and young people with special educational needs and disability, which requires clinical commissioning groups and local authorities to make joint arrangements to ensure a co-ordinated assessment of needs. The new approach will greatly improve integrated working across specialist health, education (either in mainstream or special schools), and social care, to deliver improved outcomes for the child.   There are no current plans to introduce a national register of children with cerebral palsy.